If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I've been using OS X at work, but I simply have no use for a dock to maintain minimised windows in. However sometimes I do want to hide a window, if it's something I know I'm not going to need until the end of the day (timesheet entry for example). On OS X you have to minimise it, which works just fine. On Gnome 3.8 the minimise function has been rebranded as "hide", and while there's no dock to hide the application in, you can find it in the overview.

Gnome 3 works well on my desktop, better than Gnome 2 ever did.

In Tweak Tool under "Windows" I set middle click on title bar to minimise. If you use a laptop it might be a bit more difficult, but you could probably re-purpose right click on title bar without any grief.

Comment

Come tomorrow gnome 3.8 will make win8 look like a success story .. but they could give less of a fuck about making something everybody hates

hmm I see at least problems with the version-scheme from the gnome. maybe it would been better if they would have released first a normal gnome2 version with the new gtk-versions and such stuff... than in addition they should have managed sometime together gnome (normal) and gnome-shell. or they should have called it gnome-shell version 0.1 -> 0.2 1.0 instead of the then release 4.0.

Because the problem is that the people dont just stay with the old distries and just move 2-3 years later to the first gnome-shell version they can agree too... they all await from the first version a nearly perfekt version, that has no regression from gnome2.

I think thats a problem, and even windows 8 flopped, at least they released a product after developing it for 2 years or so (or even more?) they did not release it with half of its features and not full speed and add then 20 service packs.

So thats maybe a problem maybe they should have give it a new name. so firefox became a new name it wasnt netscape 15 or something like that. Dont know there naming scheme, goblin 0.1 or something like that ^^.

Then nobody could blame on them when they not develop further the normal gnome... like it happend anyway somebody took over the old projekt, and backported it in gtk 3.

So in reality there is no big problem, just use a mint or something you like... but the only problem was that they did a bad PR work. But can you blaim developers for being bad PR People?

kde hat btw the same problem... it was not ready till several years after release of the first 4.0 version. And has still some small probs.

And Unity was even worse, was slower and more unstable than gnome-shell, and still there is nowhere so much hate than against the gnome projekt. I mean there is also hate against canonical but less about unity more because the wayland fork and how they thread community contributors.

So yes the gnome-team made mistakes... but none of them are bigger than all the other projects did (the ones I mentioned) so why the extra amount of hate. Is it a special hate-love relation or something like that?

UPDATE:

I think even some people say they hate gnome dont mean gnome-shell they mean gnome-shell and unity or only unity. So if many people (also) think on unity when they flame against the gnome-project. I could understand the amount of hate that is directed to the gnome-projekt, but it is not gnomes fault that canonical sucks and make a horrible "shell" on top of gnome.

BTW it was even worse than than, they did not only release a bad gnome-version. so some people hate gnome because of the work of canonical. They also stopped the Tandem-work on gnome.

Gnome2 got so successful because of Ubuntu. it was the first distribution that delivered a good gnome-setup. So the work of gnome devs + canonical devs made gnome strong and ubuntu strong. it was a kind of a Symbiose.

So that also made the migration harder for most people... most people never even saw gnome-shell.

Comment

I guess I'll try it....I've tried every release since 3 came out...To no success.

I didn't mind the shell, or rather I somewhat enjoyed the look. The real probs I have are with mutter & the js extensions & gtk3.

Maybe I don't fully understand the benefits of mutter, but my experience with it hasn't been very positive at all. Slow, memory chomping, & featureless as a wm. I don't understand how a full featured functional wm (compiz) gets tossed out in favor of dull restrictive mutter. It honestly does my head in. Yes compiz had some dumb plugins & useless features but a conservative configuration created an extremely functional desktop. Some of these useful wm features can be found in GS but as is the way with gnome we can't customize their actions without writing an extension.

The js extensions suck! Slowdown galore plus regular breakage with every new GS release. It was hell on Arch.

GTK3??? WTF??? Pretty useless when every .2 update breaks compatibility. The default theme is ugly as is the norm in gnome, changing the theme is futile as an update is almost guaranteed bust it. Again hell on Arch.

For a while I was keen on GS. I hacked away at nasty GTK3 & wrote up some dodgy extensions but I got tired of molesting the shell every other week.

Ignoring for a minute the idiotic attitude gnome devs have regarding 'branding' & such, the actual design isn't that bad, it's the underlying bits that cause the grief.

I've been clinging to my outdated desktop for a few years now(many thanks to Debian!). Compiz + Gnome2 + Cairo Dock + Globalmenu & a slightly hacked orta theme make for an excellent attractive functional alternative to OSX or Windows or Unity etc etc.

It's sad to me...I think the linux DE peaked right before the Gnome3/Unity mess. Seems like all the cool stuff that made the *nix DE a contender for the desktop market has or is vanishing.

Comment

I guess I'll try it....I've tried every release since 3 came out...To no success.

I didn't mind the shell, or rather I somewhat enjoyed the look. The real probs I have are with mutter & the js extensions & gtk3.

Maybe I don't fully understand the benefits of mutter, but my experience with it hasn't been very positive at all. Slow, memory chomping, & featureless as a wm. I don't understand how a full featured functional wm (compiz) gets tossed out in favor of dull restrictive mutter. It honestly does my head in. Yes compiz had some dumb plugins & useless features but a conservative configuration created an extremely functional desktop. Some of these useful wm features can be found in GS but as is the way with gnome we can't customize their actions without writing an extension.

The js extensions suck! Slowdown galore plus regular breakage with every new GS release. It was hell on Arch.

GTK3??? WTF??? Pretty useless when every .2 update breaks compatibility. The default theme is ugly as is the norm in gnome, changing the theme is futile as an update is almost guaranteed bust it. Again hell on Arch.

For a while I was keen on GS. I hacked away at nasty GTK3 & wrote up some dodgy extensions but I got tired of molesting the shell every other week.

Ignoring for a minute the idiotic attitude gnome devs have regarding 'branding' & such, the actual design isn't that bad, it's the underlying bits that cause the grief.

I've been clinging to my outdated desktop for a few years now(many thanks to Debian!). Compiz + Gnome2 + Cairo Dock + Globalmenu & a slightly hacked orta theme make for an excellent attractive functional alternative to OSX or Windows or Unity etc etc.

It's sad to me...I think the linux DE peaked right before the Gnome3/Unity mess. Seems like all the cool stuff that made the *nix DE a contender for the desktop market has or is vanishing.

Mutter has alwyas been sgnificantly faster and more stable than compiz for me.

Comment

I don't understand how a full featured functional wm (compiz) gets tossed out in favor of dull restrictive mutter. It honestly does my head in. Yes compiz had some dumb plugins & useless features but a conservative configuration created an extremely functional desktop. Some of these useful wm features can be found in GS but as is the way with gnome we can't customize their actions without writing an extension.

Compiz itself is a mess code wise and unmaintainable. Mutter runs smoothly and can mimick some Compiz effects.
Customization can be done throught gsettings or dconf. Remember that Gnome is a volunteering project and you can write a configuration frontend using Gnome HIG.

The js extensions suck! Slowdown galore plus regular breakage with every new GS release. It was hell on Arch.
GTK3??? WTF??? Pretty useless when every .2 update breaks compatibility. The default theme is ugly as is the norm in gnome, changing the theme is futile as an update is almost guaranteed bust it. Again hell on Arch.

Could it the issue related on your distribution or your own extensions? Compatibility breakage occurs on any application should it mean of improvement. For extensions, it is the job of their writers to verify the compatibility and fix them when needed.

It's sad to me...I think the linux DE peaked right before the Gnome3/Unity mess. Seems like all the cool stuff that made the *nix DE a contender for the desktop market has or is vanishing.

DE in Linux distributions haven't peaked, they grow slowly. Gnome 3 was developed in a open with full documentation available in plain sight. Unity development (derived from the early Gnome Shell) was chaotic because of Canonical attitude wanting to control the entire stack of Gnome (no different than Apple which Canonical wanted to mimic).

Comment

I've had my fair share of problems/criticisms of Gnome 3/Shell but I can't help but try every new release to see how things are going, so I'm looking forward to this release.

Supposedly performance is improved, which would be much welcomed. For me to use G Shell comfortably I have to add a fair amount of extensions, which is cool, but I always felt all the extra javascript/css (correct me if I'm wrong) tended to make the thing get pretty chuggy.

Comment

While I tried other desktops for a while, (KDE...Cinnamon....MATE....and FluxBox) I found myself returning to Gnome 3.x on a Fedora machine, and it might not be as good as version 2.x...but it can pass muster for what I need it to do, my only complaint is the fact that they "took away" the option of being able to "Fill-Scale-Center-Tile etc" your desktop background, I'm constantly on the move with different musical events and every now and again I have to have my laptop open projected on a screen, and because of not being able to change this feature some of the pictures I have for the background don not display properly, some pictures were execeptionally huge and when I used to st it as background it would fit nicely, but because the feature has been removed, it now just swells up in the background and I'm left with photos that have removed the upper torso of figures, lopped off one whole side of an image, or it turns huge & blurry because the original image was a thumbnail used for tiling.....(sigh!~) I wish they would just bring that option back....or provide the place where one can go to install it. (And if anyone happens to know please feel free to share!..LoL!) Other than that I will be sticking with Gnome only because I've become so used to it and can move around in it with ease, and precision.